Climate Change

Background
High oil prices and technological advances have turned oil sands into a commercially-viable source of fuel. A number of energy companies have invested heavily in expanding oil production from oil sands in Canada, which is home to close to half the world’s oil sands reserves. The European Union imports very little oil derived from Canada’s oil sands, but fuel from oil sands has recently become a point of contention.

The European Union’s fuel quality directive, which was agreed in 2009, requires oil companies operating in Europe to cut the greenhouse-gas emissions of their products by 6% between 2010 and 2020. The EU was supposed to adopt emission footprint values for all types of fossil fuels by 1 January 2011. But this technical decision has been postponed repeatedly.
The European Commission is considering whether to assign a higher emission footprint value to oil sands because of the energy-intensive techniques used in the extraction process.

Environment groups are opposed to production of oil from oil sands on the grounds that extraction takes place in untouched forest areas and can produce considerable amounts of toxic waste. They also argue that putting oil sands on an equal footing with conventional oil would send out a wrong signal about the EU’s commitment to de-carbonising its economy, and would encourage the exploitation of oil sands in other parts of the world, which are less democratic and regulated, instead of encouraging the world towards the use of cleaner energy sources.

The Canadian government and European energy companies investing in oil sands point out that CO2 emissions from oil-sands production have been reduced by nearly 40% since the 1990s. They argue that the carbon intensity of oil sands, taken along the entire production chain, is within the same range or lower than other crude oils and that technological innovation can deliver further reductions.

As worldwide oil-sands reserves are equivalent to more than twice the current reserves of conventional oil, the stakes are high. EU member states appear undecided. The European Commission is still pondering its final decision, and independent studies diverge on the actual carbon footprint of oil sands.

Is it justified for the EU to adopt specific measures on the oil sands? How should other high carbon crudes be treated? What is the actual carbon footprint of oil sands? How does this compare to other fossil fuels? Can technology help to mitigate it? What about other environmental impacts of oil sands development? How compatible is it with EU climate change policy? Would an EU decision to penalise oil sands affect the world’s use of fossil fuels?

—————————————————————————-

Timing

18.00-18.30 Welcome of participants and registration

18.30-18.35 Introduction of participants by Simon Taylor, news editor, European Voice

18.35-19.05 Panel discussion

- Satu Hassi MEP, co-ordinator for the greens in the environment committee, European Parliament

- Jeanette Patell, second secretary, economic and trade policy, Mission of Canada to the European Union

- Samantha Gross, director, integrated research, IHS CERA

- Nuša Urbančič, policy officer, fuels and electrification, Transport & Environment

- Pierre Noël, senior research associate, Cambridge University

19.05-19.55 Debate (audience participation strongly encouraged)

19.55-20.00 Conclusions by John Abbott, senior vice-president heavy oil, Shell

20.00 Networking reception

—————————————————————————-

Location

Museum of Natural Sciences
Rue Vautier 29
B-1000 Brussels

Related Content:

None...

Our buzzword this month is 'innovation', and we already have a great discussion underway on how the spirit of human ingenuity can be applied to clean energy. But I'd like to add another buzzword to that list, a new word, a kinda cool-sounding word, and that's smartness.Read more

Recently I had the chance to catch up with Marco Mazzotti, Professor of Process Engineering in the Institute of Process Engineering at the ETH Zurich, to discuss his research into CCS.Read more

As the European Commission is in the process of finalising its new transport white paper, a strategic document that will set the tone of EU transport policy for a decade, controversy about the sustainability of biofuels remains.

One of the goals of future EU policy will be to decarbonise the transport sector by 2050. Whereas electricity is seen to be the future of urban and short distance mobility, liquid fuels are likely to remain an essential part of rural and long-distance mobility. Biofuels have long been perceived to have an important role to play in the transition towards low-carbon transport. However, doubts have been cast about the carbon footprint of biofuels, in particular when it comes to conventional biofuels made from corn, wheat, sugar and palm oil. The potential impact of biofuels on food security is a further point of debate.

The uncertainty about the contribution of biofuels to reducing CO2 emissions was reflected in the agreement on the directive on the promotion of renewable energy. EU leaders originally intended to include a target of 10% of biofuels in transport by 2020. However the final text only mentioned 10% of ‘energy from renewable sources’ in transport.

One of the main elements of the Directive was the inclusion of mandatory sustainability criteria for biofuels in order to protect forests, wetlands and other areas of high conservation value. It allows for a voluntary certification scheme for biofuels, which would also apply to imports.

The directive also foresees that the Commission should review the impact of indirect land use change – that is, the notion that biofuels production can displace existing agricultural activities, creating indirect emissions elsewhere. The Commission is required to report the European Parliament and Council by the end of 2010, reviewing the impact of indirect land use change effects on greenhouse gas emissions of biofuels and addressing ways to minimise that impact.

The question of indirect land use change (iLUC) remains a divisive issue, over which Commission departments have not been able to agree. There is evidence that iLUC risks can be mitigated by introducing better agricultural practices. Others actors are calling for iLUC penalty factors to be added to the greenhouse gas calculations for biofuel feedstocks to reflect iLUC risk. The Commission launched a public consultation in July 2010, to get external feedback on the studies it has carried out or commissioned thus far.

What will be the place of biofuels in the future energy mix of Europe’s transport sector? Can a transition to low-carbon transport happen without biofuels? What can be done to prevent or mitigate the negative impacts of indirect land use change?

* * *

Timing

18.00-18.30 Welcome of participants and registration

18.30-18.35 Introduction of participants by Jennifer Rankin, energy and environment reporter, European Voice

18.35-19.05 Panel discussion

•    Jens Rohde MEP, coordinator of the ALDE group on the ITRE committee
•    Hans van Steen, head of unit, regulatory policy and promotion of renewable energies, DG energy, European Commission
•    Thomas Gameson, director government and public affairs Europe, Abengoa Bioenergy
•    Jos Dings, director, Transport & Environment
•   Jeremy Woods, lecturer in bioenergy, Imperial College London

19.05-19.55 Debate (audience participation strongly encouraged)

19.55-20.00 Conclusions by Luis Scoffone, vice-president, alternative energies, Shell

20.00 Networking reception

Discussion:

Related Content:

None...

Discussion: As the first decade of the 21st Century closes, can we be pleased with the progress we have made in the development of energy efficiency and the mitigation of climate change?

Related Content:

None...

The emission of greenhouse gases has been the heart of the matter in environmental discourse throughout its growth and development. For as long as the science has told us that the levels of greenhouse gases in the earth atmosphere are damaging the planet, political attempts to reach agreement on a reduction of emissions have been ongoing.

In this month’s Comment Visions we travel to Norway to talk to a man whose career has involved studying the changing nature of our planet. Dr Pal Prestud is an ecologist and serves as the Director of the Centre for Climate and Environmental Research in Oslo. His work has focused on the Polar Regions, which have acted as an early warning system for the sort of climatic changes greenhouse gases are driving.

Discussion: How must society adapt to rapid climate change to minimise severe upheaval?

Related Content:

None...

This month Comment Visions gets right to the heart of the climate change debate by getting a long-term weather forecast from Professor Nigel Arnell, one of the world’s leading experts on climatic patterns. Professor Arnell heads the Walker Institute for Climate System research at the University of Reading. In this programme he discusses the planet’s changing weather patterns – rising temperatures, altered rainfall patterns – and looks at the prospects for the future. By comparing data from the past Professor Arnell argues that we can make some tentative predictions about the future and that the increase in energy around the surface of the earth – a consequence of greenhouse gases – is something that needs a response.

Discussion: Climate change threatens to overwhelm society this century, so how can we prepare?

Related Content:

Live Debate - After Copenhagen: the next steps

The focus of this debate is predicting the future. We are looking at the possible consequences for the EU’s foreign policy of climate change; when global warming might force changes to the way we live and what those changes will be.

• How likely are conflicts over natural resources – water, food and fuel – and what would be the implications for the EU?

• What consequences will climate change have for the EU’s relations with third countries?

• Are large-scale environmental catastrophes necessary before politicians can contemplate making unpopular policy responses?

• How might scenario-planning help governments, industry and individuals prepare?

Related Content:

Programme - The Future of Weather